Does the Pentagon Really Have War Plans For Invading Canada?

Say whaaa? He must not work in the studies division in planning.

 

They only have so many people and so much time. They focus on conflicts that actually could occur.

 

Interesting. I was under the impression we had a studies division devoted to that. It's possible my DC tour guide was making **** up.

 

I mean they do have a planning/studies division dedicated to coming up with war plans but they focus 99% of their efforts on conflicts that are likely to occur.

 

Makes sense

 

And likely to occur is pretty wide phrase. Pretty much any country with an active insurgency, narcoterrorism, or who are a real potential rival will have at least one contingency plan.

 

I'm assuming they have plans for alien invasions. Not being sarcastic.

 

Shhhh.... don't tell anyone, but the plan to invade Canada has already been leaked... See the news conference here:

 

Sure but they'd be pretty vague. Most of those "plans" are really just a list of people the DoD will want to put in charge in such a scenario occurs.

 

Great movie.

 

You're not going to meet a bunch of staff at the Pentagon who does this planning; a lot of it is done elsewhere, either by contractors at the Academies and War Colleges and at both private and public universities, via the NSA, or private think tanks like the Rand Corp and a dozen others far lesser known. It isn't like it takes a lot of work to keep many of them updated.

 

How can we not forget the Rand Corporation ?

Their office is located in the Peoples Republic of Santa Monica and it was the Rand Corp. that coined the acronym "COIN" (counterinsurgency) and told President John F. Kennedy not to listen to former President Eisenhower's warnings not to to get involved in South Vietnam, that the Diem regime was to corrupt and you'll find yourself in a shooting war that can't be won without going to "total war."

Then the Rand Corp. told JFK that he could win a war in South Vietnam with just a few hundred Green Berets.

When the Rand Corp. war hawks discovered they bou coe ****ed up big time and got it wrong, many of the Rand Corp war hawks became anti war doves like Daniel Ellsberg.

 

Does the Pentagon have plans for invading Canada? Yes.

First the generals will put Trump in a straight jacket, then, in the middle of the night, inch him across the border into Canada, and then run ...
yelling "no backsies!" the whole way. It's a good plan.

 

There is a saying that "The military plans for the war they HOPE to fight".

For most of the modern era, American military planners "hoped" to fight a massive conventional war with the Warsaw Pact.

Some said it was the "Census Bureau type of war". Plan and train for 9 and a half years and then spend at most 6 months fighting.

Which is one reason the 1991 Gulf War worked out so well.

I've heard you can take the map of coalition movements during 1991, put them up to the light and mirror flip them, then transpose them over maps of Central Europe from the 1980s and you'll see what the U.S. hoped to do against Warsaw Pact forces. That Schartzkopts famous "Left hook" into Iraq becomes a "right hook" into Czechoslovakia and the southern part of East Germany up and toward Berlin.

At any rate, no one wants to fight long wars. no one wants to fight long wars against low grade insurgencies. So its something they would rather not prepare for.

 

If he told ya, he'd have to kill ya.

 

lol no, I ain't one of those guys ...

 

They're usually in the top 5 'first thoughts' associated with Nam for a lot of us. They had their fingerprints on very nearly everything in those days.

I personally think the need was there, it was the implementation that sucked, same with Korea. Most of the time all the options are bad, it's just a matter of trying to find the least bad one, re the proxy nature of the Cold War. Much could have been done differently, better, or both, in hindsight. The major failure lies in everybody and their mother blatantly lying to the Presidents, on all sides, not least the Joint Chiefs themselves, who should have been above that sort of cheesy political kiddy crap. Not a shining moment for leadership.

Every frigging regime in East Asia was corrupt, even Australia's, so that was just the norm. There wider issues than just Nam, just as there was re Korea; you can't run around building mutual defense and trade treaties and propping up eastern Europe and alllies in the ME and Africa if you run away from situations that threaten your SEATO treaty allies in Asia; they are all watching what you do elsewhere.

Yes, that was just bizarre; JFK probably knew better, but he was far more concerned with himself and his polls and winning the next election and didn't want to look soft on Communism, and probably thought he could BS his way out of any problems later; FDR suffered the same conceited delusions re Stalin; that sort of upper class vanity never works out well. The Kennedys were a disaster for the U.S., as far as I'm concerned.

Self-interested rats always desert a sinking ship, especially one they sink themselves. Suddenly changing stripes and claiming to 'be doves' was just a bunch of weasels covering up their own dishonest feckless blunders and avoiding responsibility for abandoning a lot of fine people to Commie butchers and vermin.